Should Public Restrooms Become Gender Neutral?

[The Steel Magnolia]

I think it's counter-factual to deny there is a very persistent rape culture which primarily and nigh-exclusively has negative impacts on women far moreso than men. This is not to say that men are not impacted by this, and there is an underrunning view that men cannot be raped or that it's a joke, and that's a problem. The statistics on male victims of rape are also problematic, both because they conflate prison rape and because they deny the whole made to penetrate thing.

Rape is absolutely a gendered thing however. It is the most fundamental expression of power of another human being there is, and it is used by men primarily to do so. It expresses itself in both explicit actions and subtle commentary. Be it catcalls, rape culture, misogynistic jokes; make no mistake. Sexual violence is very, very gendered. It doesn't mean that it doesn't fuck over men too, but that doesn't mean it's misandrist.

How is rape gendered. You havn't demonstrated at all how it is, you've just stated it is.

I'm not really sure how I can in a way you'd accept. Showing that men are the majority of rapists or women the majority of victims (which edges to something almost equal if you include prison rape, which is a problem make no mistake, but one that's accomplished by prison reform and is largely unconnected to the rest of society) shows the relationships between genders in regards to criminals and victims, but a lot of issues in regards to gender are often unacknowledged social perceptions and actions. Anecdotal evidence isn't always helpful precisely because it's unverifiable but so much information of this sort is. I just really feel that on a fundamental level you misunderstand the power of attitudes and perceptions in regards to sexual violence, and misogyny as a whole. The role of casual privilege, and the relationship that has to sexual violence.

I don't think I can demonstrate it in a way you will ever accept, and I think that's very unfortunate. I know because of my experience and the experience of everyone I know from every part of the western world. I know it from the jokes, the cynicism, the callousness that people express towards survivors of violence and the ignorance people display on a daily basis.


Lindy West had something up on Jezebel yesterday (link) about the idea of "sexism fatigue" where you just get tired of the constant low-level shit you're having to bat aside.

You kind of start to wonder when you can actually make some sort of an impact or do something other than just work to assure people that the issue you're talking about is even an issue anymore anyway.

To put it simply, I AM TIRED OF TRYING TO EXPLAIN THIS SHIT TO PEOPLE WHO DON'T WANT TO HEAR IT. Especially "jokes" like MacFarlane's, which, to the layperson's ear, barely register above microaggressions (if the kind of people who see no problem whatsoever with "We Saw Your Boobs" were the kind of people who used the term "microaggressions"). I am tired of trying to have an intellectual discussion about dog-whistle sexism in a culture where prominent politicians are still trying to grasp what rape is, and in a world where little girls are shot in the head because they want to go to school. Asking people to think critically about some hacky jokes from a dancing cartoonist? You might as well wear a sandwich board that says, "Yell at Me With Bad Grammar."

I am tired of being called a shrieking harridan for pointing out inequalities so tangible and blatant that they are regularly codified into law. I am tired of being told to provide documentation of inequality in the comments sections of a website where a staff of smart women documents inequality as fast as our fingers can move. Like, you might as well write me a note on a banana peel demanding that I prove to you that bananas exist. I am tired of being asked to "cite sources" proving that sexism is real (that RAPE is real, even!), because there is no way to concisely cite decades and decades of rigorous academia. Allow me to point at the fucking library. We can't cite "everything," and our challengers know that. It's an insulting diversionary tactic, it's an attempt to drag us all backwards, and fuck it. Do your own research like the rest of the grown-ups.

What are you supposed to do when someone asks you to "prove" that feminism isn't a massive conspiracy theory in a country where we've only had 39 female senators in the nation's entire history, and 20 of them are serving right now? What kind of a stupid fucking question is that? What are you supposed to say when the 8,000th faux-incredulous jackass throws you the same argument about the wage gap or the draft or bumbling dads in Tide commercials—as though holding each of their hands individually through the empirical facts of the world around us is a worthwhile use of my time. As though feminist academics haven't filled books (decades of books) with answers to that shit already. As though they believe that if they can keep you occupied refuting their flimsy trump cards over and over forever, they can stave off any changes to the culture that keeps them on top. I am so fucking fatigued by this anti-intellectual repetitive shell game that all I could do on Sunday night was write jokes about Barbra Streisand's hella goth choker.

But. I couldn't quit doing this any more than my cells could "quit" processing oxygen (or whatever cells do! Us girls aren't so good in the sciences!). I'm not a feminist by choice, I'm a feminist because this is the world. And if my fatigue sounds defeatist, it isn't. It's the opposite. It's an internal rallying cry that reminds me how bad things are. If you pay attention to and comment on everyday inequalities—immense and tiny—if you let all of it filter through you and you hop around and eyeroll and groan and drive your boyfriend crazy because he just wants to watch the IT Crowd but you NEED to talk about what Pat Robertson said today, this is what happens. Seth MacFarlane will go on the television and make a joke about George Clooney having sex with a 9-year-old girl who is sitting right there, and your first reaction will be, "Well. At least he didn't literally say she should get raped. Pass the cheese."

[The Two Jerseys]

From a practical standpoint, I'd venture to say that most women wouldn't want to share a bathroom with strange men (and given some things I read here about women's bathrooms, most men probably wouldn't want to share with women either...), so in the end pretty much nobody will end up using the unisex bathroom and will use the men's/women's rooms instead, and it will end up being an unused waste of money if they do install it.

Trans* people apparently don't exist?

And actually to be fair, people not wanting it is a perfectly legitimate reason, though obviously not if you take it to an extreme.

I'm perfectly fine with compromise, and if part of my ideology is hypocritical because I think something works in a specific instance and not in others is perfectly fine with me.

That's kind of what I was saying in the first place, a small wheelchair-accessible unisex bathroom with 1-2 toilets would be appropriate and would probably get some decent use, but I really don't think there's demand to justify a unisex bathroom with 20-odd toilets.

For the record, I really think that Brighton is just doing this to publicize the fact that they're trying to become the British version of San Francisco. When facilities started installing unisex bathrooms over here I don't remember anybody making a big deal about it.

[Ostroeuropa]

So you cannot demonstrate it. You once again brought up that the majority of rape victims are female and the majority of rapists are male (Outside prison.) but didn't show how this is any different from my "Majority of rapists are ethnic minorities" point. Alright. As for your news post, it's interesting, but I feel it focuses too much on one side of the issue. I'd regard the level of casual sexism in society as effecting both genders. Something that can and has been pointed out before. The fact it occurs against people is monstrous and should be stopped. But you still didn't demonstrate rape is gendered. Yes, you admit you probably can't without using anecdotal evidence. At that point, I have to be a bit of an asshole and say "Then why are you discussing it as though it's true?"
If you could show that rape IS gendered in nature, i'd re-evaluate my position.
Would you likewise support unisex bathrooms if you found out it WASN'T gendered?

And at this point, isn't the burden of proof heavily on you to prove the positive claim that it is gendered?
Something you've admitted you can't do. Well... how then can you be sure it's true?
You're discriminating and segregating people based on what, anecdotal evidence? Would you accept that shit for ANYTHING other than gender?
You claim it's me who won't understand. Well, try me. Where is your evidence that rape is gendered. If I don't understand then thats that, but at least for the sake of other readers you shouldn't leave your posistion so open to being casually dismissed.
"That which is claimed without evidence can be dismissed without evidence."

[Vitaphone Racing]

Space, plumbing requirements (the same as installing a shower) and the general fact they stink.


Because generally if you've got a bathroom large enough to accommodate a urinal, you can easily run a partioning wall through it to make two separate toilets. I don't see why a unisex toilet couldn't have urinals and toilets but I don't see why a toilet needs to be unisex in the first place.


In Australia I think it's the law that these facilities are provided for women's restrooms.


Nope, but if you can assure women will only use three toilets it's easier to take care of three rather than six bins.


I don't see the issue with the way things are done in the first place.

Oh! Well then I can help!

The current arrangement:

-Creates discomfort and even out-right danger for trans people.

And unisex toilets... don't create discomfort for many non-trans-people? Or can non-trans people "just get over it"?

-Makes things difficult for parents with young children, since a father is not permitted to use the same bathroom as his 7 year old daughter, and so on.

I've taken young children of the opposite sex to the bathroom many times and have never had a single issue. I find people are extremely understanding when a guardian of a child of the opposite sex comes into the bathroom. Not once have I been told "you can't bring that thing in here, fuck off!"

You should take a census. See if parents are that pissed off about trying to take their kids of the opposite sex to the toilet that they're in favour of mandated unisex public restrooms. It's really not that big of a deal.

-Often results in inefficient use of space, since dividing walls take up floor space and create more crowded bathrooms.

Yep, a paper thin partitioning wall that supports zero structural load. You lose maybe a cubical and a sink at worst case.

-Can contribute to the gender-segregated culture that many of us find harmful and objectionable.

Not going to argue with this but not sure I agree with it either.

[Cameroi]

really depends on the volume of demand. in a village of 25 people, it would be ridiculous for the restroom in the one bar and girl and the one at the railroad station to have to have a separate his and hers.

likewise the temporary portapotties at events. of which there's never enough. next come, next served.

on the other paw, in magacasino restaurant in megacity plus, you're gonna need a lot more capacity then a two holer, and yes, people are going to expect and demand gender privacy. you might even want separate xhe and xher besides, if that's what it takes to make everyone happy.

[Wind in the Willows]

-edited-

[Ostroeuropa]

Fucking political correctness gone mad.

Hello, my name is inigo montoya.
Amidoinitrite?

[Bottle]

-Creates discomfort and even out-right danger for trans people.

And unisex toilets... don't create discomfort for many non-trans-people? Or can non-trans people "just get over it"?

You seem to have missed the part about trans people face direct danger.

-Makes things difficult for parents with young children, since a father is not permitted to use the same bathroom as his 7 year old daughter, and so on.

I've taken young children of the opposite sex to the bathroom many times and have never had a single issue. I find people are extremely understanding when a guardian of a child of the opposite sex comes into the bathroom. Not once have I been told "you can't bring that thing in here, fuck off!"

That's nice for you, and I'm glad, but unfortunately it is not universally the case. The fact that you, personally, have not experienced a problem does not mean other people are likewise immune.

-Often results in inefficient use of space, since dividing walls take up floor space and create more crowded bathrooms.

Yep, a paper thin partitioning wall that supports zero structural load. You lose maybe a cubical and a sink at worst case.

It seems like you agree with me that this is an issue, you just don't feel it is important (enough) to do something about. That's certainly up to you, but hopefully you are able to recognize that you have just admitted that this issue exists.

-Can contribute to the gender-segregated culture that many of us find harmful and objectionable.

Not going to argue with this but not sure I agree with it either.

That's fine too. As long as you agree that the issue exists (regardless of your stance on it), that still constitutes an answer to your question.

To sum up, you are now aware of the many problems that other people have with the current system, so now you can no longer say that you "don't see the issue." You still may DISAGREE, of course, but you can no longer insist that you don't know why other people are bothered. Hooray!

[The Reasonable]

I'm a bit late joining this thread, so I'll say this:

It's economically feasible to do this. All future restrooms are to be built in one large area, while current segregated ones simply have their signs changed. It'll also shut certain people up about their supposed oppression as a side benefit and leave them with one less thing to complain about. Actually, two less things, if there is a significant amount of violence that comes from "going in the wrong bathroom" (but I think that the violence is a red herring in this debate, as it's a societal issue rather than bathrooms in particular).

That being said, I don't see any problems with installing urinals in those rooms. It's cheaper than new toilets and allows men to finish business more quickly, and I don't think accusations of de-facto segregation are fair at that point.

Fucking political correctness gone mad.

I just think it's a bit more economically efficient. The fact that the transgendered gets thrown a bone is a side benefit.

[Ostroeuropa]

Out of interest, do you think gendered bathrooms should be banned, or gender-neutral bathrooms allowed in law

(if they aren't already, I suspect there may be a lot of provisions in law for womens bathrooms being required in order to fight institutionalized sexism and these should be scrapped or altered to "Adequate facilities for all persons." which may well be the phrasing already, i dunno.)

and then it'll naturally progress that way?

I think if we make them allowable everywhere, and compulsory in government owned buildings, we're done and dusted with the problem and the free market will be all
"We should use unisex bathrooms. It's cheaper and we don't look like sexists."
But JUST legalizing it won't give the necessary momentum.

[The Steel Magnolia]

So you cannot demonstrate it. You once again brought up that the majority of rape victims are female and the majority of rapists are male (Outside prison.) but didn't show how this is any different from my "Majority of rapists are ethnic minorities" point. Alright. As for your news post, it's interesting, but I feel it focuses too much on one side of the issue. I'd regard the level of casual sexism in society as effecting both genders. Something that can and has been pointed out before. The fact it occurs against people is monstrous and should be stopped. But you still didn't demonstrate rape is gendered. Yes, you admit you probably can't without using anecdotal evidence. At that point, I have to be a bit of an asshole and say "Then why are you discussing it as though it's true?"
If you could show that rape IS gendered in nature, i'd re-evaluate my position.
Would you likewise support unisex bathrooms if you found out it WASN'T gendered?

And at this point, isn't the burden of proof heavily on you to prove the positive claim that it is gendered?
Something you've admitted you can't do. Well... how then can you be sure it's true?
You're discriminating and segregating people based on what, anecdotal evidence? Would you accept that shit for ANYTHING other than gender?
You claim it's me who won't understand. Well, try me. Where is your evidence that rape is gendered. If I don't understand then thats that, but at least for the sake of other readers you shouldn't leave your posistion so open to being casually dismissed.
"That which is claimed without evidence can be dismissed without evidence."

No I cannot demonstrate it in a manner you will ever accept, not without sourcing the mountains of literature on the issue or bringing up anecdotes. And honestly, that's simply not feasible nor acceptable. Both men and women are negatively effected on the patriarchy, but that doesn't change the fact that it is the hatred of femininity moreso than anything else which causes the problems evident. Women being automatically awarded custody or given lesser sentences fucks over men (in the former case, in the latter it merely benefits women which is distinct and different). It comes out of the view that women are homemakers and unsuitable for careers outside of taking care of the young, or women are passive and therefore unable to possibly commit such a crime. Or if she did, it was due to her womanly irrationality.

Few if anyone explicitly thinks that, but it doesn't mean those attitudes don't exist on unacknowledged levels.

The problem with the rest of your points is that though anecdotal evidence is unverifiable it is not inherently invalid. It just means that it's next to impossible to use it as a source, but that doesn't mean it didn't actually happen. All I can do is point you to the decades of literature and research about the issue - I can't cite every possible book or treatise on the patriarchy and you know it perfectly well.

All I can say to you is to live it. Be aware of what your female friends and colleagues say on their experiences of low level and high level sexism. Don't dismiss anecdotes merely because they're anecdotes. Be aware of their position and unreliability as a source and the fact that they're really not useful in this type of discussion, but people talk about their own experiences all the time and you cannot reject those experiences because they're undocumented.

So yeah, make no mistake the burden of proof is on the claimant and I'm making the claim that rape is gendered. But really, if you have any understanding of the role of gender in society, something from your posts I often wonder, how could you possibly claim that it is not?

It shows a deep and intentional ignorance of the role and power that views in society play, and an intentional rejection of personal experiences.

[The Steel Magnolia]

Fucking political correctness gone mad.

Political correctness doesn't fucking exist. It is a made up concept used by people who want to be assholes without being called out on it.

You value free speech so much? Well guess what, I have the right to criticize hate speech as I see it.

[Ostroeuropa]

Having read all that, you've once again returned to
"It's just obvious." as a response. That's paraphrasing ofcourse. I'm sorry, but that's entirely insufficient. I could offer similar evidence for racism, and in history that's precisely what people did.
It's obvious, we have anecdotes etc.

They also tried their hand at bungled science too, but these days we're wise to that tactic.
I disagree that everything sexist in society is aimed at keeping women down. It comes from expectations to fulfill gender roles.
Men aren't imprisoned more harshly because women are delicate flowers and all that shit, they are imprisoned more harshly because they failed to live up to the male gender role which is all about responsibility and shit.
You also didn't bring up the male rape issue. Probably because it's incredibly hard that males being disbelieved about them being raped is aimed at keeping women down. So you disregard it as an example because it doesn't fit your worldview.
Ask yourself whats more likely here.
Sexism against men is a side-product of sexism against women AND ALSO there happens to be sexism against men (male-rape victims.)
OR
There is just sexism against men and also sexism against women.

Yes, this does have the opposite effect of meaning that women are viewed as irresponsible. Thats the point. Sexism inevitably cuts both ways.
At this point, i'll say to you that you're sounding religious. Since you are an atheist maybe you'll appreciate that. You havn't come up with anything except anecdotal and "Our books say so."

[The Reasonable]

Fucking political correctness gone mad.

Political correctness doesn't fucking exist. It is a made up concept used by people who want to be assholes without being called out on it.

You value free speech so much? Well guess what, I have the right to criticize hate speech as I see it.

Not all use of offensive language is hate speech. Context matters- a word only has whatever connotation people gives it.

You think comedians are politically correct? If not, then why aren't they derided as hatemongers? Because context matters.

So it's not a simple matter of what language is used- but in what context it is used.

Some people dress up racism in the politest language possible, while LBJ even privately used the n-word.

[Ostroeuropa]

Political correctness doesn't fucking exist. It is a made up concept used by people who want to be assholes without being called out on it.

You value free speech so much? Well guess what, I have the right to criticize hate speech as I see it.

Not all use of offensive language is hate speech. Context matters- a word only has whatever connotation people gives it.

You think comedians are politically correct? If not, then why aren't they derided as hatemongers? Because context matters.

"How do people manage to attend a comedy show, and not suspect the motherfucker on stage...might be joking?" - Reginald D Hunter

[Seshephe]

OP

Many Public restrooms in Sweden are. I fail to see how this has had any negative effects at all. Honestly, it's called a queue. What kind of middle age mindset do you have to have to feel compelled to allow every girl to go first?

[The Reasonable]

Not all use of offensive language is hate speech. Context matters- a word only has whatever connotation people gives it.

You think comedians are politically correct? If not, then why aren't they derided as hatemongers? Because context matters.

"How do people manage to attend a comedy show, and not suspect the motherfucker on stage...might be joking?" - Reginald D Hunter

Hence my point. Context matters. Offensive language/speech was in that case used in the context of a joke, so it was fine. But even if it isn't, it still should be evaluated based on context as opposed to "don't use that word! It's ebul!"

Even polite language should be called out for being offensive, if it clearly is dressed up hate speech.

[Alexander Sothis]

When they build the new Student center at the university here. They installed Gender Neutral bathrooms along side the male and female ones. It simply became a place for sex. The people who the bathroom was designed for didnt want to use them because it 'singled them out'.

[Cameroi]

political anything don't have jack to do with the points i have raised. see my previous post.

[Seshephe]

When they build the new Student center at the university here. They installed Gender Neutral bathrooms along side the male and female ones. It simply became a place for sex. The people who the bathroom was designed for didnt want to use them because it 'singled them out'.

The solution is simple. Make all of the bathrooms gender neutral.

[Ostroeuropa]

As an aside, whats more likely to cause fear.
The unknown or the commonplace.
You want to protect rape victims steel magnolia? Fine. Unisex bathrooms is the way to go.

[The IASM]

One problem, male/female perverts.

[Seshephe]

One problem, male/female perverts.

Locks....
They are there for a purpose

[East Catalina]

Nah. Women's restrooms are nasty.

Here is something I wonder: Women tell me that they squat over a toilet rather than sit on it because they don't trust that the toilet seat is clean. They then proceed to piss all over it.

Is the irony lost on them?

Phahahaha...
but seriously no. The restrooms at my school (are those considered as fitting the adopted definition of "public"?) are nasty enough.

[Vitaphone Racing]

And unisex toilets... don't create discomfort for many non-trans-people? Or can non-trans people "just get over it"?

You seem to have missed the part about trans people face direct danger.

When you have a source showing me that trans-people are disproportinately assualted around toilet areas, I'll bite. Funnily enough, the very areas which unisex toilets are common (ie. nightlife hotspots) are also the areas which I'd consider to be the most dangerous to anybody, let alone trans-people.

I've taken young children of the opposite sex to the bathroom many times and have never had a single issue. I find people are extremely understanding when a guardian of a child of the opposite sex comes into the bathroom. Not once have I been told "you can't bring that thing in here, fuck off!"

That's nice for you, and I'm glad, but unfortunately it is not universally the case. The fact that you, personally, have not experienced a problem does not mean other people are likewise immune.

Then where is the communal outpouring of grief over this issue? If it's such an issue that people claim it to be, why is the only place I here about it on NSG? Where is the concerned parents for unisex toilets action group and how do you sign up?

My beef is that you have taken a problem which many people have and then proposed a solution which nobody asked for but still seemed to expect their automatic support.

Yep, a paper thin partitioning wall that supports zero structural load. You lose maybe a cubical and a sink at worst case.

It seems like you agree with me that this is an issue, you just don't feel it is important (enough) to do something about. That's certainly up to you, but hopefully you are able to recognize that you have just admitted that this issue exists.

I'm sure many thousands of people lament the extra sink and cubicle which they possibly could have used each day. You could remove this space issue with clever packaging and engineering so in many cases, it's a non-issue.

Not going to argue with this but not sure I agree with it either.

That's fine too. As long as you agree that the issue exists (regardless of your stance on it), that still constitutes an answer to your question.

No, I agree that there could potentially be an issue. I haven't seen a shred to suggest that these toilets "contribute to the gender-segregated culture that many of us find harmful and objectionable" and I'm merely taking your word for it.

To sum up, you are now aware of the many problems that other people have with the current system, so now you can no longer say that you "don't see the issue." You still may DISAGREE, of course, but you can no longer insist that you don't know why other people are bothered. Hooray!

If that was your only goal then I guess you succeeded. At least I can always fall back on saying "I don't see how the issue's worth fixing with unisex toilets".